City Property Tax Dollars for 'Historic Preservation' and a Charter School?

An Opinion by Pete Donegan, Alderman, 1st District:

To my fellow citizens who promote the restoration of the Eschweiller buildings and the Forest Exploration Center Charter School: I thank you for your care and work for our City and sincerely hope that you take no offense to my comments.

So here is the deal:

There are four buildings on the County Grounds that we refer to as the “Eschweiller buildings.” They are architecturally significant and, to some, quite beautiful.

They have also been unused for many years and are very dilapidated. It would require many millions of dollars to restore them and, despite their placement on the Historic Registry in the late '90s and their command of all County Grounds development decisions since 2004, no money has been raised or recruited, from the market or through philanthropy, to provide for their restoration.

In addition, I don’t believe that the average Tosan is familiar with them and even knows what I am talking about here. By contrast, the Tosa Pool at Hoyt Park happened almost exclusively with philanthropy (no property tax help) and the recently approved skate park will be two-thirds funded by private donations and fundraisers.

So, the Historic Preservation Commission finally conceded to a plan that would restore just one of the buildings and tolerate the “conversion” of 3 others to “English Gardens” (ie: a kinder, gentler demolition). That demolition will be avoided if a fledging charter school named the “Forest Exploration Center” or “University Lab School” (the concept continues to evolve) can raise enough money in two years to restore the buildings and use them as a school.

OK, fine, except for one thing. The Wauwatosa taxpayers will be asked to contribute $2.5 million to throw this party.

That is, $2.5 million to assure the restoration of one building to be used as a leasing office for an apartment complex and to give a Charter School a chance to restore the other three buildings as a middle/high school.

The school, by the way, is advertised as “regional.” That is, not just for Tosa kids. It is also still a “vision” and a long way from becoming a reality, and we are asked to be the first big contributor to a project that may not fly – lacking a philanthropic anchor. And, at last check, our School District is very opposed to this school because it will dilute it’s already stressed primary revenue source.

So, the proposition to this alderman is this: Our Administration has been reporting to us for two years that the forecast of city expenses is greater than the forecast of revenues and that we are very challenged to maintain our current level of services – ie: police patrol, garbage collection, snow removal etc. Our schools are similarly challenged.

In this context, I am asked to divert tax funds to a) the restoration of an architecturally significant building that only a few seem to value; and, b) the start-up of a charter school.  

The few who have sentiment for these buildings are very passionate and have been highly effective in “managing” the Common Council for their purpose.  One or more of their members have occupied positions of influence inside City Hall for many years. The rhetoric about this charter school has an appeal to some. Both interests are very vocal.

But I believe that both are very much minorities and are very “special” interests and that most of our citizens want our council to avoid this expansion of city services, and most of us simply do not value either proposition enough to divert $2.5 million to them from basic services.

There is much obfuscation in this proposal. The additional $2.5 million in TIF funds – on top of the $14.5 million, plus interest, for the County Grounds developments – is postured as critical to the UWM Innovation Park vision.

That is not true at all. The renovation/charter school subsidy will be imbedded in a proposal to build a 190-unit apartment complex on the Grounds.

I agree that this apartment complex is critical to the Innovation Campus vision. The question is; can these apartments happen without the additional city subsidy if they are not required to restore the Eschweillers?

I will want that question thoroughly examined by numerous developers if necessary. Unfortunately, it appears that such an analysis is being delayed.

So, to be clear:190 apartment units will be built, on the County Grounds and in an already approved TIF district. Kids will live there and attend our schools. The police will patrol and respond there. Their street will be plowed when they wake up in the morning after a snow storm, and their garbage will be picked up weekly, and the their street will be lit, and they will be welcomed at the library, and they will enjoy many other City services.

But – they and the owner of the property will pay just a fraction of what the rest of us pay for those services. Most of their property tax payments will be used exclusively to enhance or offset the costs of their apartment complex.  You and I will pay for the local portion of their kid’s education and their policing and garbage etc.

That’s a done deal. That is no longer under discussion.

On the table now is that they want us to pay an additional $2.5 million to restore a historic building on their site to be used as a leasing office and tenant exercise room and maybe a charter school. (Are you going to visit there and gaze upon the beauty and significance?). 

So if I had to vote today, I would vote to deny property tax funding (via tax-incremental financing) for “historic preservation” and/or charter school initiatives. I believe that would be the will of our citizens. Please let your aldermen know how you feel.

It looks like after 2½ years of the “special interest” deliberation, your Common Council will finally be allowed into the conversation in July to consider your $2.5 million, and those interests will probably put a gun to our heads – "If you don’t approve this right now, all sorts of bad things will happen to Innovation Campus….”